Speech Identification Test in Telugu: Considerations for Sloping High Frequency Hearing Loss
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12970/2311-1917.2016.04.02.4Keywords:
Speech identification test, sloping high frequency hearing loss, flat frequency hearing loss, high frequency word lists, conventional word lists, speech identification score.Abstract
The present study developed two high frequency word lists (HFWLs) with each list consisting of 25 words for assessing individuals with sloping high frequency hearing loss (SHFHL). Speech identification score (SIS) testing was carried out on normal hearing subjects who were equally divided into three groups. The results revealed that there was no significant difference (p>0.05) in mean SIS of each group between two lists, and between three groups for each list. The groups’ mean SISs were 99.68% and 99.60% for two lists respectively which are in the normal range of SIS. In order to check the applicability of HFWLs, SIS testing was carried out on subjects with sensorineural hearing loss who were equally divided into two groups. Group I: Individuals with flat frequency hearing loss (FFHL-Group). Group II: Individuals with sloping high frequency hearing loss (SHFHL-Group). SIS testing was carried out using four conventional word lists (CWLs) already existing in Telugu and two HFWLs developed in the present study. The results revealed that there was no significant difference (p>0.05) in mean SIS between CWLs and HFWLs in FFHL-Group. However, there was a significant difference (p<0.05) in mean SIS between CWLs and HFWLs in SHFHL-Group. SHFHL-Group obtained significantly lower (p<0.05) mean SIS for HFWLs compared to CWLs. Hence it can be concluded that CWLs would not indicate true nature of communication difficulties caused by SHFHL. On the other hand, the developed HFWLs were found be effective in identifying the true nature of communication difficulties caused by SHFHL.
References
Marschark M, Spencer PE. The Oxford Handbook of Deaf Studies, Language, and Education (vol.1), New York: Oxford University Press 2011.
Stevens KN. Toward a Model for Lexical Access Based on Acoustic Landmarks. Journal of Acoustic Society of America 2002; 111(4): 1872-1891. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1458026
Northern JL, Downs MP. Hearing in Children. 6th Ed, Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 2014.
Studebaker GA, Sherbecoe RL. Intensity-importance functions for band-limited monosyllabic words. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2002; 111: 1422-1436. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1445788
Kryter KD, Williams C, Green DM. Auditory acuity and perception of speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1962; 34: 1217-1223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1918305
Mullins CJ, Bangs JL. Relationships between speech discrimination and other audiometric data. Acta Otolaryngologica 1957; 47: 149-157. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/00016485709130328
Sher AE, Owens E. Consonant confusions associated with hearing loss above 2000 Hz, Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1974; 17(4): 669-681. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1704.669
Pascoe DP. Frequency response of hearing aids and their effects on the speech perception of hearing impaired subjects, Annuals of Otology, Rhinology, Laryngology 1975; 84(supp-23): 1-40.
Korhonen P, Kuk F, Keenan D, Peeters H, Hau O, Andersen H. Critical Factors in Ensuring Efficacy of Frequency Transposition. I: Individualizing the Start Frequency. Hearing Review 2007; 14: 60-67.
Gelfand SA. Essentials of Audiology, 2nd Ed, New York: Thieme Medical Publishers 2007.
Hirsh IJ, Davis H, Silverman SR, Reynolds EG, Eldert E, Benson RW. Development of Materials for Speech Audiometry. Journal Speech and Hearing Research 1952; 17: 321-337. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/jshd.1703.321
Waghmare P, Mohite J, Gore G. Development of Marathi Speech Recognition Test (Paediatric): A Preliminary Report. Journal of Indian Speech and Hearing Association 2011; 25(1): 59-64.
Gardner HJ. Application of High Frequency Consonant Discrimination Word List in Hearing Aid Evaluation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorder 1971; 36(3): 354-355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/jshd.3603.354
Stelmachowicz PG, Pittman AL, Hoover BM, Lewis DE, Moeller MP. The Importance of High-frequency Audibility in the Speech and Language Development of Children with Hearing Loss. Archives of Otolaryngology Head-Neck Surgery 2004; 130: 556-562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archotol.130.5.556
Lundborg T, Riseberg A, Holmqvist C, Lindstrom B, Svard I. Rehabilitative Procedure in Sensorineural Hearing Loss. Studies on the Routine Used. Scandivian Audiology 1982; 11: 161-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/01050398209076213
Dean MR, McDermott HJ. Speech Perception with Steeply Sloping Hearing Loss: Effects of Frequency Transposition, British Journal of Audiology 2000; 34: 353-361. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/03005364000000151
Cooper FS, Delattre PC, Libermann AM, Borst JM, Gerstmann LJ. (1952). Some Experiments on the Perception of Synthetic Speech Sounds, Journal of Acoustical Society of America 1952; 24: 597-606. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1906940
Sinthiya K, Sandeep M. High Frequency Speech Identification Test in Tamil. In: Basavaraj V, Malar G (Eds), “Students Research at AIISH, Mysore”: Articles Based on Dissertation Done at AIISH: vol. VII, (2008-2009), Part-A, Audiology, Mysore: AIISH 2009.
Kumar SBR, Mohanty P. Speech Recognition Performance by Adults: A Proposal for a Battery for Telugu. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 2012; 2(2): 193-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.2.193-204
Luce PA, Pisoni DB. Recognizing Spoken Words: The Neighbourhood Activation Model. Ear and Hearing 1998; 19: 1-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00003446-199802000-00001
Mendel LL, Danhauer JL. Audiologic Evaluation and Management and Speech Perception Assessment, San Diego: Singular Publishing Company, Inc 1997.
